- From: Florian Rivoal <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2018 16:40:35 -0800
- To: w3c/editing <editing@noreply.github.com>
- Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Received on Wednesday, 14 November 2018 00:40:56 UTC
> The specification has implementations, but not interoperability This is true, but I don't see why this fact counts as an argument for CG over WG. The fact that it does have implementation means it is good to have a place to do maintenance and answer questions from browser engine developers. There's not particular reason that a group capable of answering such requests couldn't be recreated under a CG, but it's here now, why mess with it. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/w3c/editing/issues/185#issuecomment-438493729
Received on Wednesday, 14 November 2018 00:40:56 UTC